Why does size matter?

Now you need to work on your reading comprehension... The vast majority of his opponents weren't skilled or talented enough.

 

And how accurate do you think those pictures are?

I've seen DEXA scan results that show that some bodybuilders have quite a bit more bodyfat than their abs would make you assume.

Arreola isn't a sub 200 fighter, he looked good at 229.
But somehow you think he could have shaved off another 30 pounds.

 

So that was the point of your post? We are supposed to change our minds about Willard because people thought that he deserved a win against a light heavyweight who'd lost to Porky Dan Flynn the year before?? Oh.

We've discussed this stuff at length in other threads this year. Whatever people thought about Willard at the time his game and skill set were far more limited than those of many modern 220+ heavyweights. He looks like he's still learning how to fight in all of the clips I've seen.

 

A 230 lbs 6'6 man worth his salt should beat a 180 lbs fighter.
That's not special.

 

Your link was worthless for the reasons that have been discussed already. You don't get stripes in my book for losing a controversial decision to a crude light heavyweight who staggers you late in the fight.
Won't respond to your insults but I'm sincerely curious: do you consider yourself to be a smart person? Do you think that you come across that way in your posts? Do you feel that your claims in your posts are usually plausible, coherent, and logical? Just curious.

 

Sprinters have longer limbs and short torsos, therefore the bigger sprinter will move quicker.

This content is protected

 

You don't think size is a factor?

There are weight divisions to protect the smaller men from the heavyweights.

 

for 20 years I've been listening to people tell me David Tua is big boned, that people are naturally bigger for their height, that Lennox Lewis and the Klits could never weigh less than 230lb, that it's NOT Artificial weight, that it's NOT an actual tactic to develop into that size and NOT changes in training that is making fighters too heavy for their height....

When the truth is today the US army rejects anyone over and above what is naturally acceptably heavy for their height.

Heavyweight champions in shape, always used to meet the current US army "weight for height" requirements. Now they dont. By and large, for nearly 30 years the vast majority of elite heavyweights are too heavy for their height according to Army requirements.

Experts who scientifically compiled the weight requirements for the American military regard a maximum weight for somebody as tall as Lennox to be no more than 218lb at 18 to 21 years of age! They demand a 223lb maximum between the 21-27 age range and a "maxed out" 229lb throughout the 27 years to 39 years old range.

These are considered maximum weights for somebody as tall as Lennox Lewis not "at the quick" or "drained right down" weights.

Now, Lennox never boxed over the age of 40 years old yet in retirement, rather than blow up beyond "244lb" he appears to have rather slimmed right down.

 

Didn't we already go over the irrelevance/in applicability of those army standards in another thread recently?